BS: UK immigration too high?

Subject: RE: BS: UK immigration too high?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 06 Oct 09 - 01:18 PM

mr Happy, people have concerns over the driving down of wages, competion for jobs, shortage of social housing, services like health and education stretched and inadequate, overcrowing of roads and transport systems, environmental degradation and so on.

Subject: RE: BS: UK immigration too high?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 06 Oct 09 - 01:33 PM

Don,
your point 1.
There are controls in place but they have had little impact.
You have to suspect that our ruling class and employers are secretly very happy to have thousands of non unionised cheap labour arriving every day.
2. I do not think that current controls are sufficient.

about the BNP.

We have a history of tolerance here. The far right have never had the hold they do in France, Italy, lately Holland, Spain etc.

The concerns I put to MrH bear down hardest on the working class.
The mainstream parties ignore their concerns and call them racist.
They feel no one takes them seriously, and then along come BNP.

I hate them.
Ignorant, racist scum.
You will not drive them back where they came from by just ignoring this issue.
That is how they gain in strength.

Subject: RE: BS: UK immigration too high?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 06 Oct 09 - 01:42 PM

I take no pleasure if those bigots are indeed cheering me on, as I know the unwanted "guests" have.

It is a measure of how pathetically inarticulate they are that they are unable to string an argument together themselves, but they will get no support from me for racist policies, repatriation or any other of their nonsenses.

Subject: RE: BS: UK immigration too high?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 06 Oct 09 - 01:53 PM

sorry, not thousands every day.
hundreds more like.

Subject: RE: BS: UK immigration too high?
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 06 Oct 09 - 07:56 PM

""It is a measure of how pathetically inarticulate they are that they are unable to string an argument together themselves, but they will get no support from me for racist policies, repatriation or any other of their nonsenses.""

I'm sorry Keith, I know you mean well, but whether it gives YOU pleasure or not, every time you come out with one of those crashing inaccuracies on a public forum, you MAKE THEIR POINT FOR THEM!

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: UK immigration too high?
From: GUEST,Richard
Date: 06 Oct 09 - 08:18 PM

Don, leave them alone and they may just leave you alone.

Subject: RE: BS: UK immigration too high?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 07 Oct 09 - 03:02 AM

Don, you speak as if I make frequent "crashing inaccuracies."
I made one, and corrected it within minutes.

Let me clarify exactly.
In 2007 the average number of immigrants was one thousand five hundred and eighty every day.
It was even greater the previous year.

You were kind enough to acknowledge that I mean well.
After all the recent abuse I promise you that was warmly received.
Thanks.
keith.

Subject: RE: BS: UK immigration too high?
From: Mr Happy
Date: 07 Oct 09 - 07:38 AM

'people have concerns over the driving down of wages, competion for jobs, shortage of social housing, services like health and education stretched and inadequate, overcrowing of roads and transport systems, environmental degradation and so on.'


Ok, all above true, but how do you arrive at the conclusion that these issues are all down to immigration?

Surely, for a balanced discourse, there's many influences and variables which together are contributory causal factors of these problems

Subject: RE: BS: UK immigration too high?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 07 Oct 09 - 07:51 AM

The independent Office for National Statistics projects an increase in population of nearly 10 million in the next 20 years, nearly all in England. 70% will be due to immigration .
The need for housing pushes up rents and increases the waiting lists for social housing

The latest government household projections show that immigration will account for 39% of all new households in the next 20 years.

Meanwhile, there are more than 300 primary schools in which over 70% have English as a second language; this is nearly a half million children.

Especially in our cities, immigration is the overwhelming factor in these issues.

Subject: RE: BS: UK immigration too high?
From: Mr Happy
Date: 07 Oct 09 - 10:37 AM

http://www.statistics.gov.uk/CCI/SearchRes.asp?term=immigration&x=33&y=13

Can you point me to where it says:

'The independent Office for National Statistics projects an increase in population of nearly 10 million in the next 20 years, nearly all in England. 70% will be due to immigration .
The need for housing pushes up rents and increases the waiting lists for social housing'

Subject: RE: BS: UK immigration too high?
From: Tug the Cox
Date: 07 Oct 09 - 11:16 AM

Which single word always follows the phrase
'I am not a racist.....'

Subject: RE: BS: UK immigration too high?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 07 Oct 09 - 11:27 AM

http://www.migrationwatchuk.org/briefingPaper/document/96

"The need for housing....." is my own observation.

Subject: RE: BS: UK immigration too high?
From: Mr Happy
Date: 07 Oct 09 - 11:38 AM

Keith A of Hertford,

Your link refers the Office for National Statistics

I've given a link to it above, but here it is again.

Can you point me to where this site says:

'The independent Office for National Statistics projects an increase in population of nearly 10 million in the next 20 years, nearly all in England. 70% will be due to immigration .
The need for housing pushes up rents and increases the waiting lists for social housing

The latest government household projections show that immigration will account for 39% of all new households in the next 20 years.

Meanwhile, there are more than 300 primary schools in which over 70% have English as a second language; this is nearly a half million children.

Especially in our cities, immigration is the overwhelming factor in these issues. '

Subject: RE: BS: UK immigration too high?
From: Mr Happy
Date: 07 Oct 09 - 11:40 AM

http://www.statistics.gov.uk/CCI/SearchRes.asp?term=immigration&x=33&y=13

Subject: RE: BS: UK immigration too high?
From: Mr Happy
Date: 07 Oct 09 - 12:00 PM

http://www.statistics.gov.uk/default.asp

Subject: RE: BS: UK immigration too high?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 07 Oct 09 - 03:11 PM

it is not all in one place.
it is useful to have a reputable body do the searching.
Here are projected population figures.
http://www.statistics.gov.uk/cci/nugget.asp?id=1352

Subject: RE: BS: UK immigration too high?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 07 Oct 09 - 03:26 PM

http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2007/oct/23/immigrationandpublicservices.immigration
guardian on same projection.

Subject: RE: BS: UK immigration too high?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 07 Oct 09 - 03:29 PM

http://www.gad.gov.uk/Documents/Demography/Projections/2004-based_national_population_projections.pdf

Subject: RE: BS: UK immigration too high?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 07 Oct 09 - 03:34 PM

Tug, I would continue your sentence with the word "AND", as in;
"I am not a racist and this debate is not about race anyway"

Are you in a mindset that believes, "anyone with the slightest reservation about large scale immigration can only be a racist" ?

Subject: RE: BS: UK immigration too high?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 07 Oct 09 - 03:56 PM

Net migration
Of the standard population variants, the net migration variants have the largest impact on the household projections, reflecting the size of the variant assumptions. The high migration variant increases the number of households by 33,000 per year between 2006 and 2031 compared to the principal projection. Under the high migration variant there is an increase of 810,000 households over the 25 year projection period, leading to 28.6 million households in 2031, compared to 27.8
http://www.communities.gov.uk/documents/statistics/pdf/1172133.pdf

Subject: RE: BS: UK immigration too high?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 07 Oct 09 - 05:51 PM

http://www.dcsf.gov.uk/rsgateway/DB/SFR/s000682/SFR38-2006web3.xls#Table34!A1

Subject: RE: BS: UK immigration too high?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 07 Oct 09 - 05:59 PM

BBC reporting figs obtained by Telegraph under freedom of info act.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/education/7147954.stm

Subject: RE: BS: UK immigration too high?
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 07 Oct 09 - 06:08 PM

""Net migration
Of the standard population variants, the net migration variants have the largest impact on the household projections, reflecting the size of the variant assumptions. The high migration variant increases the number of households by 33,000 per year between 2006 and 2031 compared to the principal projection. Under the high migration variant there is an increase of 810,000 households over the 25 year projection period, leading to 28.6 million households in 2031, compared to 27.8""

Keith, these are projections, and like any other projections carry an unknowable variability factor, depending on the accuracy or otherwise of the parameters chosen from which calculations are made.

Or to put it another way, guesses of an unfathomable degree of wildness. You can't adduce ANY really credible conclusion using them. Only governments are daft enough to try.

The accuracy of the figures suggested will not be known until 2031, by which time (hopefully) you will have tired of looking for more guesses, and moved on to other things.

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: UK immigration too high?
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 07 Oct 09 - 06:10 PM

Guest Richard,

Mind your own bloody business!

Clear?

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: UK immigration too high?
From: akenaton
Date: 08 Oct 09 - 01:31 AM

Well done Keith, It seems most here are beginning to get the message,
Richard's advice to Don is particularly pertinent.

To sum up, the answer seems to be....keep calm, listen to what other people are saying, whether you agree with them or not; and deal with the ISSUES raised.....Shouting at the labels proves nothing, other than the intellectual weakness of those doing the shouting.

I hope this thread marks a change in attitude here...a move away from the lynch mob mentality and towards common sense on all controversial issues.

We should remember that we are all human beings, the labels hung on us are meaningless, just another trick to divide and "organise" society.

Subject: RE: BS: UK immigration too high?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 08 Oct 09 - 02:53 AM

Don, Governments have to be seen to be looking ahead and planning for our future.
That is why they employ highly qualified experts in sciences such as demography to spend their professional working lives studying the official figures and other hard evidence to assess current trends and project them forward.

The conclusion reached by the top experts in the land is that issues relating to immigration are most likely to become more severe in the near future.

On what evidence do you base your opinion that if we carry on as we are everything will be alright, and why should we listen to you and not them?

Subject: RE: BS: UK immigration too high?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 08 Oct 09 - 03:06 AM

Don, never mind the future, the issues I raised on health, housing, schools, employment etc, are current.
Government and employers benefit from lower production costs and wages.
The middle classes enjoy a cheap supply of domestics and nannies.
The working classes get none of the benefits and all of the downside.
They are told that they only complain because they are racist.
In the absence of anyone else who will listen they turn to BNP, who rapidly turn them into racists.

You and people like you in politics are the problem Don.

Subject: RE: BS: UK immigration too high?
From: Mr Happy
Date: 08 Oct 09 - 09:32 AM

KAoH,

Thanks for your new links, none of which, I note, are from your 1st referent, The Balanced Migration site.

I've examined all of your links & find ambiguities, contradictions & omissions from included info.

I쳌fll not list them all right now, but will do so if necessary.


Here쳌fs a contradiction to your assertion that immigration is the greatest cause of population growth in UK :

Guardian article: [about population increase in UK] http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2007/oct/23/immigrationandpublicservices.immigration

The Office for National Statistics said the surge was caused by an unprecedented combination of trends - rising fertility, rising life expectancy and rising inward migration.


Here쳌fs a typical example of an omission;

From here

http://www.communities.gov.uk/documents/statistics/pdf/1172133.pdf

You cited this excerpt:

Net migration

Of the standard population variants, the net migration variants have the largest impact on the household projections, reflecting the size of the variant assumptions.

The high migration variant increases the number of households by 33,000 per year between 2006 and 2031 compared to the principal projection. Under the high migration variant there is an increase of 810,000 households over the 25 year projection period, leading to 28.6 million households in 2031, compared to 27.8 million in the principal projection. Over a third of the additional households are one person households, whilst a further 29 per cent are married couple households.


But you omitted this excerpt


The low migration variant has a slightly smaller impact on household numbers in absolute terms than the high migration variant, resulting in an average of almost 31,000 fewer households per year between 2006 and 2031 relative to the principal projection. Under the low migration variant there is a decrease of 770,000 households over the 25 year projection period, leading to 27.1 million households in 2031, compared to 27.8 million in the principal projection. Just under a third of the reduction in households is one person households and a further third are married couple households.

The zero net migration variant projection assumes zero net migration in the population at all ages. This does not give a pure measure of zero net migration on household formation as the composition of the inward and outward migrants and their propensity to form households will be different, but it illustrates the extent to which the migration assumptions impact on household numbers over and above natural change in the population.

******************

Seems to me you쳌fre just picking out the bits that suit your hypotheses, rather than presenting the whole picture

Subject: RE: BS: UK immigration too high?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 08 Oct 09 - 09:46 AM

Mr. Happy, you specifically asked me to find figures from Office of National Statistics.
If you do not agree with any of them, you should take it up with ONS not me.

Nit picking quibles about minor items hardly answers my case that the current unprecedented level of immigration raises some legitimate issues and concerns, and that many well informed people think it should be reduced.

Do you object to any of that, if so exactly what please?

Subject: RE: BS: UK immigration too high?
From: Royston
Date: 08 Oct 09 - 09:48 AM

Quite right, Mr. Happy

Don't hold your breath for any original thinking from people - just more selective cut and paste snippets that suit their view of the world from some biased sources.

You see people are quick to see the problems - demands on housing, health, schools and issues around wages, but staggeringly slow to see solutions - like building more of that which we are short of (with the tax revenue from productive workers) and strengthening legislation to protect minimum wage and low-paid workers.

Subject: RE: BS: UK immigration too high?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 08 Oct 09 - 10:03 AM

Royston the current rate of providing housing, services and infrastructure has been falling further and further BEHIND the needs of our rapidly rising population, and if you offer that as a solution to people suffering real need right now they will laugh at you (if you are lucky) and you will deserve it.

If you kept up with the news you would know that all the talk now is of REDUCING expenditure.

Your "solutions" are a joke , so what is your next big idea?

Subject: RE: BS: UK immigration too high?
From: Riginslinger
Date: 08 Oct 09 - 10:14 AM

"...people are quick to see the problems - demands on housing, health, schools and issues around wages, but staggeringly slow to see solutions - like..."

             Placing a moratorium on immigration and deporting the louts who are unwanted now.

Subject: RE: BS: UK immigration too high?
From: Royston
Date: 08 Oct 09 - 10:41 AM

Yes Keith, the talk NOW is of reducing expenditure the same way that the TRUTH NOW is that immigration is falling through the statistical floor and is not exactly a live issue either NOW or in the FUTURE, based on present levels.

You keep talking up a problem whose existence was questionable based on your selective cherry-picking of 2006/2007 projections. At the time your forecasts were made we were in a miraculous economic boom and there was plenty of money and resources to make the social investments I have been talking about, and plenty of jobs for the incomers. All that was missing was the political will.

If politicians had cared one small fraction as much about PEOPLE as they have cared about BANKS & BANKERS, we could have solved all of our social infrastructure problems.

NOW that there is nothing to support your scaremongering, you should just shut up. Thet only people NOT laughing at you are the BNP clones and ringinlsinger who is somewhat to the right of Herman Goering.

Subject: RE: BS: UK immigration too high?
From: Mr Happy
Date: 08 Oct 09 - 10:43 AM

I find I omitted to insert the URL for Migration Watch which was actually the site I wanted you to give the requested info from [it being your primary referent in your first posts.]

***************

'.......many well informed people(?) think it should be reduced'

In order to become informed, its best if you examine material from a variety of sources, not just the ones which reflect your prior assumptions.

*************

According to Eurostat, Some EU member states are currently receiving large-scale immigration:

for instance Spain, where the economy has created more than half of all the new jobs in the EU over the past five years

Spain is the most favoured European destination for Britons leaving the UK.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Immigration


*************

My observation is: immigration looks like good news for Spain!


So why not for here too?

Subject: RE: BS: UK immigration too high?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 08 Oct 09 - 11:05 AM

Royston, please post some evidence for your extraordinary statement, "immigration is falling through the statistical floor and is not exactly a live issue either NOW or in the FUTURE"

mr happy balanced migration is a small and easy to navigate site, unlike ONS which took hours to search!
http://www.balancedmigration.com/ourcase.php

You will easily find what you want.

Subject: RE: BS: UK immigration too high?
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 08 Oct 09 - 02:41 PM

""Nit picking quibles about minor items hardly answers my case that the current unprecedented level of immigration raises some legitimate issues and concerns, and that many well informed people think it should be reduced.

Do you object to any of that, if so exactly what please?""

One man's nit picking is another man's deliberate misinformation.

Either quote the whole article or don't use it at all. There's no brownie points for cutting out what disproves your assertions, because somebody will always catch you out.

---------------------------------------------------------------------

Given that I am the one being harrassed by the BNP, and YOU are apparently their new champion, I think most here will know just WHO is the dangerous one.

As a role model, you would make a good greengrocer.

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: UK immigration too high?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 08 Oct 09 - 03:07 PM

Don, those were very large documents.
No one would read the whole thing.
It is usual to extract the relevant piece and provide the link.
That is what I did.
I deny anything misleading.
Please identify specifically anything you consider misleading.

BNP are thugs and they will behave thugishly.
Why be angry with me?

Subject: RE: BS: UK immigration too high?
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 08 Oct 09 - 05:38 PM

""Please identify specifically anything you consider misleading.

BNP are thugs and they will behave thugishly.
Why be angry with me?""


Mr Happy already identified the point at which you emphasised the facet which supported your claim, but ignored the other half of that statement, which would have brought the whole int balance, but would, at the sme time have weakened your POV.

That is evidence of bias, and brings the credibility of your stance into dispute.

As to my comment about the BNP, whether you realise it or not, you are advancing their argument quite vehemently, and giving them cause to rejoice.

They believe you are proving their argument, and unfortunately they will have ammunition supplied by you which they will delight in using, out of context to show British Folkies catually supporting the BNP.

That reflects on the whole forum, so why wouldn't I be angry with you?

I know that you are absolutely NOT a racist, but they will claim you as a brother, and others will believe it too.

I just wish we could bury this thread, and discuss the issues elsewhere.

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: UK immigration too high?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 09 Oct 09 - 02:28 AM

Mr Happy you accuse me of not pointing out that
The Office for National Statistics said the surge was caused by an unprecedented combination of trends - rising fertility, rising life expectancy and rising inward migration.

I could accuse you of pushing a half truth for not pointing out that our rising fertility is itself due to immigrants who have a much higher fertility7 than the existing population.

You also accuse me of not posting the projections for low and zero immigration because they are much nicer than the projection for continued high immigration.
BUT MY WHOLE POINT IS THAT WE WOULD HAVE A MUCH BETTER FUTURE IF WE COULD ONLY ACHIEVE A LOWER RATE OF IMMIGRATION!!!

Subject: RE: BS: UK immigration too high?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 09 Oct 09 - 02:38 AM

Don, you seem to be saying that because there are such people as racists we must never discuss the problems of immigration.
I do not hold that view, though the main parties actually do.

BNP will know of the government survey that found 79% of the population want immigration cut.
That a few folkies do too will not further there cause very much.
They also know and have access to Migrationwatch and Balanced Migration whose views I have been posting.
So no extra ammuntion for them there either.

I was not just invited, but challenged by Royston to discuss immigration.
I am sorry if that is regretted now.

Some of you attacked BNP and set yourselves up as their enemies.
(Bravely I think. Fair play to you all.)
That is why they are enjoying the spectacle of you all vainly trying to deny an obvious truth, i.e. that there are perfectly valid and respectable arguments for reducing immigration.

Subject: RE: BS: UK immigration too high?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 09 Oct 09 - 03:11 AM

Royston, I am still looking forward to some support for your statement, "the TRUTH NOW is that immigration is falling through the statistical floor and is not exactly a live issue either NOW or in the FUTURE, "

Perhaps you could find a half decently qualified demographer, or some people from parliament, or some official government statistics, you know, the sort of stuff I have routinely provided to support my case.

Obviously that will be difficult if you are totally wrong, as when you thought that immigration peaked some time in mid 20th Century.

You have never actually provided any supporting evidence.
Why is that?

Subject: RE: BS: UK immigration too high?
From: Mr Happy
Date: 09 Oct 09 - 05:07 AM

KAoH,


'I could accuse you of pushing a half truth for not pointing out that our rising fertility is itself due to immigrants who have a much higher fertility7 than the existing population.'

*************

I do resent that you've accused me of 'half truths', when after all, I've merely reproduced here a sentence from your own link to the Guardian article http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2007/oct/23/immigrationandpublicservices.immigration, which indicated a relevant response to your assertion that immigration was the only cause of population increase.



Anyone was able, as was I, of clicking that link & reading the complete passage or did you want me to copy/paste the whole thing here ?

Furthermore, in that same article, there's no mention at all of relative fertility levels of any particular group of people.


Might your accusation statement above be in reality based upon, as you've stated elsewhere in this debate, your own observations?

'They breed like rabbits, y'know!!'



**************


'You also accuse me of not posting the projections for low and zero immigration because they are much nicer than the projection for continued high immigration.


BUT MY WHOLE POINT IS THAT WE WOULD HAVE A MUCH BETTER FUTURE IF WE COULD ONLY ACHIEVE A LOWER RATE OF IMMIGRATION!!! '

****************

Possibly, you don't understand that all of the statistical info in that passage is all based upon projections.

Now anyone with even a little nous would discern that 'projections' are not the same as 'facts'

Also, since you've shouted in BIG CAPITALS, you've proved that your own underlying agenda is that you in fact wish to restrict access for anyone wanting to migrate to UK, for dubious reasons of supposed detriment to this country.

Here's a couple of comments from the Guardian article which, I feel, represent a more balanced view:

'Sir Andrew Green, the chairman of the Migrationwatch campaign group, said the levels of immigration predicted would change Britain "irrevocably and permanently", urging ministers to take action now to avoid "very serious" consequences for the country.

Sir Simon Milton, the chairman of the Local Government Association, said: "Migration is benefiting the country, generating in total over £40bn every year. '

Subject: RE: BS: UK immigration too high?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 09 Oct 09 - 05:42 AM

Mr Happy,
"your assertion that immigration was the only cause of population increase."

Not true.
I did not assert that.
I said it was the main cause and ONS agrees.
ONS also says that immigrant fertility is higher than existing population. Would you like a link?

The projections are made by government experts on the best and fullest data available. Projections of current trend.
You did not like the projection for continued high immigration.
You slated me for not quoting the nicer projections for a future with lower immigration. Why?

Subject: RE: BS: UK immigration too high?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 09 Oct 09 - 06:23 AM

Overall fertility of foreign-born women is higher than that of UK-born women.
http://iussp2009.princeton.edu/download.aspx?submissionId=93139

Subject: RE: BS: UK immigration too high?
From: Mr Happy
Date: 09 Oct 09 - 06:39 AM

Keith A of Hertford,

I'm not sure if you're being deliberately obtuse, but my use of the word 'only' rather than 'main' or even 'greatest', seems somewhat irrelevant given that casual examination of the gist of the statement is the same.

In addition, all my comments in that specific post were clearly referring to the Guardian article which doesn't contain any mention of fertility comparisons.

************

I feel from your latest responses that it will be completely futile to try to continue any discourse on these topics, as you seem determined to carry on in your deluded perceptions and instead of contributing any reasoned, balanced evidence to support your opinions, I'll withdraw from the 'debate'

Subject: RE: BS: UK immigration too high?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 09 Oct 09 - 07:07 AM

Before you go Mr Happy,

1I have given impeccable sources for every statement I have made.

2I said immigration is the main factor in current population increase and it is.

3It was you who raised the issue of fertility.

Subject: RE: BS: UK immigration too high?
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 09 Oct 09 - 05:59 PM

""1I have given impeccable sources for every statement I have made.""

Impeccable according to WHO?

A Whitehall appointed government quango, a man whose activities are inextricably linked with an organisation which has a very dodgy past, if not present, and YOU.

Hardly impeccable at all then!

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: UK immigration too high?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 10 Oct 09 - 03:12 AM

The Office Of National Statistics.
What do they know about anything?
A bunch of overqualified statiaticians, demographers , sociologists etc.
Employed by all governments to provide them with the facts on which to base their policies and to answer parliamentary questions.
Universally respected by all political parties.
Not nearly as impressive as the sources used by your side of the argument.
What were they again?
Oh yes. Royston's imagination.
And that was it.

Subject: RE: BS: UK immigration too high?
From: Royston
Date: 10 Oct 09 - 09:05 AM

I haven't forgotten you Keith. More's the pity. I've been working in the Czech Republic this week and in Liverpool now with little free time.

Save me some trouble, please. Do you still claim that all your, and Migrationwatch's, forecasts for worst case scenario - all based on 2006 and 2007 figures are still valid now? In spite of the 2008 points based restrictions on migrations and on the 2008 end of the economic new world order.

If you accept that the world now is not the same as the one that generated your paranoid figures then I will not have to go quite so far in proving you to be a blinkered liar and fantasist.

Subject: RE: BS: UK immigration too high?
From: Royston
Date: 10 Oct 09 - 03:09 PM

For the time being Keith, here are some facts from one of my earlier posts that you ran away from.

Even on a 2009 -v- 2008 comparison, inward immigration is down 50%. As we already established that the peak year was 2004, but it remained at similar levels through 2005/6/7 before falling, the present situation is nothing like any of your doom-mongering BIASED FORECASTS that were cast on 2006/2007 numbers.

When will you learn Keith?

More will follow when I have time.
-------------------------------------

And what is immigration down to now?

Annual immigration statistics for 2008 and quarterly immigration figures for April to June 2009, covering migration from Eastern Europe, asylum applications and removals and voluntary departures, were published by the Home Office on 27 August 2009.

The figures show that work applications from the eight accession countries have continued to fall in 2009. In the second quarter of this year there were 26,150 applications from workers in Poland, Lithuania, Latvia, Hungary, Slovakia, Slovenia, Estonia and the Czech Republic - down from 46,070 in the same period in 2008.

The number of Bulgarian and Romanians applying for accession worker cards also continues to fall. There were 580 applications in the second quarter of 2009, a fall of 43 per cent, compared to the same quarter in 2008.

The Office of National Statistics (ONS) published figures earlier the same day that show net-migration fell to 118,000 in 2008, from 209,000 in 2007, the lowest since the eight accession countries joined the EU in 2004.

In the first half of 2009, 30,435 people illegally in the United Kingdom were removed or voluntarily departed from the country, including 2,550 foreign prisoners. The latest figures also confirm that a total 67,980 people were removed or voluntarily departed in 2008.

Individuals seeking asylum in the United Kingdom has remained broadly at the same level over the past four years. It is less than a third of the level when it peaked in 2002. Applications for asylum in the second quarter of 2009 were 6,045 compared with 5,830 in quarter two 2008. The Home Office is now concluding 60 per cent of new asylum cases within six months.

Numbers reducing dramatically with magnificent progress on removals. Keith might even consider reducing his medication at this rate.

Source - UK Border Agency